Ethic Codex

C Z E C H  P O L A R  R E P O R T S

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

For all parties involved in the act of publishing (the author, the journal editor(s), the peer reviewer and the publisher) it is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour. The below ethics statements for Czech Polar Reports are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Czech Polar Report has a policy related to ethic issues such as authorship, author responsibilities, plagiarism, fabrication, duplicate publication, confidentiality and pre-publicity. The policy is summarized below and structured as follows:

  1. Publication and authorship
  2. Authors responsibilities
  3. Reviewers responsibilities
  4. Editor responsibilities
  5. Publishing issues

If you have ethical concerns on a paper, whether published or in review, please contact the Editor of the Czech Polar Reports in the first instance. The Editor will then follow the COPE guidelines as substantiated and explained below.

1. Publication and authorship

Originality of data, text and interpretation

Material submitted to the Czech Polar Reports must be original and not published or submitted for publication elsewhere.

List of References

List of references is an obligatory part of a manuscript submitted to Czech Polar Reports. All citations that appear in a manuscript (typically in Introduction, Material and Methods, and Discussion) must be reported in References. Internet sources, maps and issues of similar matter must be reported as Other sources below the References.

Acknowledgements and funding sources

If research reported in a manuscript submitted to the Czech Polar Reports was supported by a funding agency, University, ministry or other institution, financial support must be stated in the manuscript, typically in Acknowledgements. The authors are requested to identify who provided financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the manuscript and to briefly describe the role funding institution(s) and/or sponsor(s), if any, in study design.

Submitting author

Submission of a manuscript to the Czech Polar Reports is taken by the journal to mean that all listed authors have agreed all of the contents. The corresponding (submitting) author is responsible for having ensured that this agreement has been reached, and for managing all communication between the Czech Polar Reports and all co-authors, before and after the publication.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is not tolerated in the manuscripts submitted to the Czech Polar Reports. Plagiarism occurs when large parts of text of other authors are cut-and-pasted into a manuscript without proper citation. Thus, plagiarism is when an author attempts to pass off someone else's work as his/her own. Duplicate publication, sometimes called self-plagiarism, occurs when an author reuses substantial parts of his or her own published work without providing the appropriate references. This can range from getting an identical paper published in multiple journals, to the cases when authors add small amounts of new data to a previous paper. The Czech Polar Report editors judge any case of which they become aware (either by their own knowledge of and reading about the literature, or when alerted by reviewers) and inform the Editorial Board about that. Manuscripts showing signs of plagiarism may be rejected from the editorial work and sent back to corresponding author. Such manuscripts would not be considered for publication in the Czech Polar Reports.

Fraudulent data

No fraudulent data will be accepted for publication in Czech Polar Reports.

2. Author's responsibilities

Suggestion of reviewersCorresponding author of a manuscript submitted to the Czech Polar Reports is welcome to suggest suitable independent reviewers when they submit their manuscripts, but these suggestions may not be followed by the journal.
Data statement

Also the corresponding author has to state that all data in the manuscript are real and authentic and should provide retractions or corrections of mistakes each time they consider it necessary.

Author´s role in the submission

The corresponding author is obliged to check that all authors have significantly contributed to the research reported in a manuscript submitted to Czech Polar Reports

Author´s role in peer review process

The corresponding author is obliged to participate in the peer review process and apply the requirements made by the reviewers in order to have their article published in the Czech Polar Reports.

Author´s role in revision of a manuscript

All authors of a manuscript submitted to Czech Polar Reports are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.

Author´s communication with Editor

All communication between corresponding author and Editor is confidential. Authors must also treat communication with the journal as confidential. The author´s correspondence with the journal, reviewers' reports and other confidential material must not be posted on any website or otherwise publicly announced without prior permission from the editors. Authors of published material have a responsibility to inform the Czech Polar Reports Editorial Board promptly if they become aware of any part that requires correcting. Any published correction requires the consent of all coauthors, so time is saved if requests for corrections are accompanied by signed agreement by all authors.

Conflict of Interets

All authors are requested to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations within two years of beginning the submitted work that could inappropriately influence, or be perceived to influence, their work. Each submitted paper should be accompanied by a Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement signed and scanned.

3. Peer review / responsibility for the reviewers

Objectivity

Reviews of manuscripts submitted to Czech Polar Reports should be conducted objectively according to scientific standards. Personal criticism of the author is inacceptable. Reviewers should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments. Reviewers should report their comments, suggestions, as well as weak points clearly in a special letter to the Editor and Corresponding author.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Czech Polar Reports editor.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage of reviewer. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.

Promptness

Any reviewer who has been invited to review the manuscript but feels unqualified to do so or to do so in reasonable time limit should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.

4. Editor responsibilities

Acceptance/Rejection of a manuscript

The editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept a manuscript submitted to the Czech Polar Reports and they should have no conflict of interest with respect to the articles they reject/accept.

Manuscript improvement process

The editors have a responsibility to inform corresponding author about reviewer´s opinion as well as Editorial judgement of the manuscript submitted to Czech Polar Reports and revised manuscript to the reviewer, if he/she is willing to re-evaluate the manuscript. The Editor preserves anonymity of a reviewer.

ProofsAfter acceptance, a proof is sent to the corresponding author, who circulates it to all coauthors and deals with the journal on their behalf. The Czech Polar Reports may not correct errors after publication if they result from errors that were present on a proof that was not shown to co-authors before publication. The corresponding author is a person responsible for the accuracy of all content in the proof, in particular that names of co-authors are present and correctly spelled, and that addresses and affiliations are up to date.
Errata

When substantial errors are found in a paper, the Editor promotes publication of correction or retraction.

Scientific names of organisms / Geographical namesAuthors of manuscripts that contain taxonomy (that is, the formal nomenclature and description of a newly discovered species) and geographical names should be aware that it is possible for third parties to exploit the prior publication of nomenclature/geographical names at any time between submission of a manuscript and publication.

5. Publishing ethics issues

To handle publishing ethic issues, Czech Polar Reports follow general rules and standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals. Editor of Czech Polar Reports uses an on line resource The Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) to handle publishing ethic issues: ( http://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk).

Complied by CPR Editorial Board on Aril 15th, 2014